----- Original Message -----
From: Bruno Marchal
To: everything-list.domain.name.hidden
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: The Meaning of Life
(Brent's question skipped)...
BM:
Assuming comp, we can know that science will never been able to explain
where natural numbers come from. That's an insoluble mystery.
It makes science open. Forever.
But then comp *can* explain (but does not yet provide more than an
embryo of explanation, yet already confirmed) where waves and particles
come from, and also, unlike physics, why waves and particles can hurt
(cf G/G*).
Bruno
A question in the 1st par: (Not the "assuming" or not part): it is the nature of that particular type 'science' prohibiting to disclose the origin of ANY numbers.
*
As evolutionary complexity (and I emphasize this 'comp') goes, the hominid compared things, fingers, etc. and found 2 (two) hands/feet. Paralle to its mental development it realized 5 fingers on each. Compared to children in the cave and as the veins in his neck widened (through increasing holes in the skull etc.) for more blood into the developing neuronal brain, named the 'count', "added" both hands if there were many kids and so on. I skip the ramifications, counting was developed with 'numbers named' and it is only a quanti developmental difference to arrive at a Hilbert space, or CQD. The growing neural complexity allowed the coordination of hand-muscles to make the hand-ax a projectile, something chimps have not yet achieved. It went in quantitative (no qualitative emergence and no random invention) steps to the spacerocket application.
Then, gradually, the human mind became capable of more complexity - to explain natural observation at the level of the time in a quantised (physicalistic) fashion.
*
In another science-view, if we look at the processes as in a reductionist model separation, the numbers may appear as God, creating the universe. Unexplainably.
It is another viewpoint of another form of 'science'.
The above is not my obsession, I see it as free thinking.
*
Bruno, I looked at your 'knots' (my head still spins from them) and agree to their topological - math view, no need of a material input. Which one was Alexander's?
Best wishes
John M
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.11/723 - Release Date: 3/15/2007 11:27 AM
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Thu Mar 15 2007 - 17:23:17 PDT